Author Topic: New Films 2009  (Read 50440 times)

Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #840 on: December 09, 2009, 02:06:26 PM »
"Directed by The Wachowski Siblings" doesn't have the same ring to it really.

Also I was hoping it was the bald fat one. Sadly it was the skinny feminine looking one.

The Widow of Brid

  • At least I've got my drastic sexual variations
Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #841 on: December 09, 2009, 05:08:31 PM »
I think he's said something about being gender-queer rather than pre-operative transexual. Though predictably I can't find the reference.

An tSaoi

  • The Prodigal Cunt
Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #842 on: December 09, 2009, 06:38:43 PM »
The news broke that he was getting the chop years ago, but when they made Speed Racer a few cast members say that his masculine name is still on the call sheet. It seems he's a transvestite, not a transsexual.

Rev

  • A Manufacturing Concern
Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #843 on: December 10, 2009, 12:25:31 AM »
They did change their standard credit from the 'The Wachowski Brothers' to 'The Wachowskis', but 'Lana' was pretty much a tabloid invention.  He just likes dressing up like a cheap prostitute now and then.

I mean, seriously, if I cross-dressed, I'd look classy.

Rev

  • A Manufacturing Concern
Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #844 on: December 10, 2009, 12:35:23 AM »
Oh, yeah, I knew I came into this thread for a reason:

The Box.

Now, I know what you're going to say.  You'll accuse me of hyperbole when I say that this is one of the worst films I've ever sat through.  You'll think that what I mean is that it was just a bit sub-par, slightly tedious, maybe not up to being in the top ten releases of the year.  Not that bad, surely?

No.  NO.  It's truly fuck-awful.  A simple, elegant concept ruined by a knee-brained idiot.

non capisco

  • My valve is screaming for appeasement.
Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #845 on: December 10, 2009, 12:43:46 AM »
It is a complete dog's breakfast of a film I grant you (I'm convinced there's a scene missing towards the end as even by this film's wacked out jerry-built standards there's one bit that just doesn't make any kind of narrative sense) but it isn't the worst film I've seen this year. I found it a less depressing two hours than Harry Brown for starters. If only The Boat That Rocked had a pleasing CGI effect of Rhys Ifans missing half his face.

This has to be the last time Hollywood let Richard Kelly make a film on his own terms though. I honestly thought it started out alright, but from the scene where he drives her out of Community to the motel onwards it was like they'd left the script out in the rain.

Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #846 on: December 10, 2009, 08:22:59 AM »
(I'm convinced there's a scene missing towards the end as even by this film's wacked out jerry-built standards there's one bit that just doesn't make any kind of narrative sense)

Do you mean the bit where [spoiler]he suddenly appears coming out of the aircraft hangar thing near the end?[/spoiler] That looked like a reels-in-the-wrong-order mistake to me, it was that bad - absolute nonsense. Its a howler. The Santa Claus scene had people falling about.

Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #847 on: December 10, 2009, 08:52:37 AM »
It worked better when it was a 15 minute or so episode of the underrated 80s Twilight Zone revival, but I did enjoy a certain amount of the bonkers nonsense Kelly threw seemingly randomly at the screen. Bear in mind I liked Southland Tales too.

non capisco

  • My valve is screaming for appeasement.
Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #848 on: December 10, 2009, 10:09:10 AM »
Do you mean the bit where [spoiler]he suddenly appears coming out of the aircraft hangar thing near the end?[/spoiler] That looked like a reels-in-the-wrong-order mistake to me, it was that bad - absolute nonsense. Its a howler. The Santa Claus scene had people falling about.

Exactly the bit I mean, yes.

Johnny Townmouse

  • Member
  • **
  • The cha-cha boogies of Edmundo Ros
Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #849 on: December 10, 2009, 10:34:57 AM »
For all you fans of subtle and ambiguous morality tales, Haneke's The White Ribbon (which won the Palme D'or this year) is out and is sumptuous.

*probably spoilers, I dunno*

Haneke really seems to be entering his golden period, and seems to have found a very happy balance between doing whatever he wants, and finding human films with which to push that vision through. As usual I went to see this in the afternoon, and was surrounded by oldies - a very well  behaved group of people except for the sweet wrapper opening which they do insist on doing slowly and quite loudly, rather than the preferred fast and very loudly. But it was very bizarre watching a Haneke film and hearing the audience going "awww" consistently - due to the presence of some very heart-warming and doe-eyed children, who also appeared to be remarkably good actors  (or were extremely well directed by Haneke).

I have deliberately avoided articles and reviews of this film prior to seeing it, so I'm not sure what is the received opinion. Obviously there are allusions to the first world war and the second world war, implicitly and explicitly. It was hard not to consider the fact that the children are about to witness the atrocities of the first world war, and by the time of the start of the second world war, they would be adults, decision makers, and possible Nazis.
Overall, it did seem to be about the sins of our fathers, and how cruelty and the abuse of power is something that is passed down with increasing intensity to future generations.
On that basis, the use of the white ribbon as a motif seemed very heavy-handed - unless I was missing something else?

The scenes between the teacher and the nanny were amazingly well written and acted, I loved every minute of it. However, the scene between the doctor and his mistress is one of the cruellest and unpleasant I have ever witnessed in film, where only dialogue is used as a weapon.

Did anyone else have a really strong association with Dogville whilst watching this?

The film reminded me that I should go back and rewatch Time of the Wolf, my favourite post-apocalyptic film.

Vitalstatistix

  • Photocopies are not admissable as memories
Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #850 on: December 10, 2009, 02:20:04 PM »
Agree with you about all that.

[spoiler]We found the white ribbon motif really the only thing out of place. Unless we're also missing something, it does seem a little obvious, especially for Haneke. Superb film nonetheless.[/spoiler]

Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #851 on: December 16, 2009, 06:50:12 PM »
Has anyone seen 'Where The Wild Things Are'? Hmm. I saw it today and I found it quite shit. It could've been great. But it's just full of "Oh, we've run out of story for 10 minutes? Let's have a big pointless jump and run-around, wahhhhh!!!" During these bits the camera work is a mess and I got the feeling I'm expected to automatically share the childlike enthusiasm of the characters. The kid was fucking annoying too. James Gandolfini was bloody excellent though. It seems to be getting great reviews but I can see Empire and co. backtracking in the next few months once the hype has died down.

Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #852 on: December 16, 2009, 07:01:10 PM »
It could've been great. But it's just full of "Oh, we've run out of story for 10 minutes? Let's have a big pointless jump and run-around, wahhhhh!!!" During these bits the camera work is a mess and I got the feeling I'm expected to automatically share the childlike enthusiasm of the characters. The kid was fucking annoying too.

I loved all of these aspects of the film. I thought the kid was great and I'm really glad they didn't shoehorn a plot into the film. I don't think it's a masterpiece, but I don't believe there will be much of a backlash either.

Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #853 on: December 16, 2009, 07:16:06 PM »
I think the new Sherlock Holmes film may actually be passable, based purely on Robert Downey Jr. Bit odd to see a Snatch-esque bare-knuckle boxing scene in there though.

Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #854 on: December 16, 2009, 07:18:40 PM »
I thought Where the Wild Things Are was fine, but not truly great. I wanted to like it more than I did as it represents the kind of ambition and maturity you want to see more of in kids films, but it just wasn't as, forgive my corniness, captivating as it needed to be to be a rousing success.

Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #855 on: December 16, 2009, 10:27:06 PM »
I think the new Sherlock Holmes film may actually be passable, based purely on Robert Downey Jr. Bit odd to see a Snatch-esque bare-knuckle boxing scene in there though.

After seeing the trailer, and despite being a big fan of the 1980's Jeremy Brett Holmes, I do think this looks like it might be quite a fun action movie.

As for the boxing scene, Holmes is actually a skilled pugilist in the original stories so at least it is sticking to the source material in that respect.

Re: New Films 2009
« Reply #856 on: December 17, 2009, 06:29:57 AM »
Heh heh. The appearance of the Chipettes made me giggle. I must be easily amused.

Alvin and the chipmunks 2 movie trailer